The democracy and justice over chaos already exists within the book.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
RippedMan said: "Donica sounds...fine. You could throw a rock down 8th Ave and hit 100x singers who would sing it just like that. He's just not exciting. And the design seems King and I minimal. Eh. Curious to hear thoughts, but didn't love the Sorkin Mockingbird."
inception said: "RippedMan said: "Donica sounds...fine. You could throw a rock down 8th Ave and hit 100x singers who would sing it just like that. He's just not exciting. And the design seems King and I minimal. Eh. Curious to hear thoughts, but didn't love the Sorkin Mockingbird."
"He's just not exciting."
!!!
Jordan Donica is the sexiest man alive"
All subjective, for sure. Just doesn't do anything for me. Vocally, acting. But all good, glad you enjoy him! I will say he sounds better here than in MFL.
dramamama611 said: "The democracy and justice over chaos already exists within the book."
I understand. This is just one of those situations where, for me, Monty Python and The Holy Grail so thoroughly dismantled the high-minded premise of the show that it’s tough for me to take it seriously. And I know Sorkin will insist that I not only take it seriously but draw analogies to the United States.
But Sorkin is one of the few popularly successful writers who has made a living with ‘political’ stories, so I’m not betting against him, or Bartlett Sher.
I hope this turns out great and is a big success. And ‘If I Ever Leave You’ is certainly a gorgeous ballad.
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Dolly80 said: "What’s with the American accents when they sing? I hope that doesn’t happen in the theatre."
I don’t know what the plan is for the production, but the audition notice said to use your own accent. It could be a choice of director/writer to try to thread the similarities to America today."
Kate Wilson is credited as “Vocal & Dialect Coach” - which I realize isn’t determinative, but I too am hoping they don’t use incongruous American accents.
barcelona20 said: "RippedMan said: "Donica sounds...fine. You could throw a rock down 8th Ave and hit 100x singers who would sing it just like that. He's just not exciting. And the design seems King and I minimal. Eh. Curious to hear thoughts, but didn't love the Sorkin Mockingbird."
While watching the video, I kept picturing Joshua Henry and wondering how he would have been."
I saw the opening tour cast of Hamilton in 2017, with Joshua Henry as Burr and Jordan as Lafayette/Jefferson, they would both everything you could want. I think Jordan has an amazing voice (he SLAYED An Impossible Dream at Carnegie Hall), and this truly feels like his first LEAD role on Broadway, but wowww thinking about Joshua singing If I Would Ever Leave You? Swoon.
Joshua Henry was so fantastic as Burr that my daughter and I joked that the musical could have been renamed Burr.
Jordon Donica was miscast as Lafayette. I felt badly for him trying to do the rapid-fire rapping in a French accent a la Daveed Diggs. It felt almost unfair. Let’s just say he didn’t sound French. You could see his visible relief, like a weight had been lifted, when he could play Jefferson. But his voice seems much better suited for classical roles. I can’t comment on his acting. I saw My Fair Lady at Lincoln Center, but not with him.
"One of the other major changes Sorkin has made is to the musical’s love triangle between King Arthur, his queen, Guenevere, and the knight Lancelot. “I wanted those stories to feel relevant to 2023." Do we think Arthur is......you know.....in this version of the musical?
"I wanted Camelot to work as a play with songs." eeeeeeek...
“Instead of having the story take place in a kind of Middle Earth,” Sorkin said, “I wanted it to take place in a real time and place – England in the late-15th century, on the eve of Enlightenment – and to make Arthur a real king.” a smart, potentially interesting thing to do.
RippedMan said: "Donica sounds...fine. You could throw a rock down 8th Ave and hit 100x singers who would sing it just like that. He's just not exciting. And the design seems King and I minimal. Eh. Curious to hear thoughts, but didn't love the Sorkin Mockingbird."
Donica absolutely brought the house down in the recent Broadway NY Pops concert, in a way that doesn’t typically happen to that degree in the Pops concerts. The audience went ballistic, and he was the talk of every revue of that concert. Delusional to think that 100x singers on 8th Ave could have that effect.
“Instead of having the story take place in a kind of Middle Earth,” Sorkin said, “I wanted it to take place in a real time and place – England in the late-15thcentury, on the eve of Enlightenment – and to make Arthur a real king.”a smart, potentially interesting thing to do."
Camelot in the 15th century? A 15th century England that hadn't had the rule of law or a code of chivalry or a king's counsel for a thousand years? What kind of 15th century England is that?
Sorry, this makes no sense Camelot is unequivocally a dark ages musical. Not a rennaisance, let alone eve-of-enlightenment--three centuries after the 15th by the way-- one. It takes place in a time of legend. Period.
It's also a 15th century England with a diverse population of people who express emotion through song (and, if some rumors are true, speak with American accents). As with other fairytales, I'm willing to overlook that element if it adds a layer of interest, knowing that this is perhaps a multiverse coexisting alongside Richard III or Henry V.
“Instead of having the story take place in a kind of Middle Earth,” Sorkin said, “I wanted it to take place in a real time and place – England in the late-15thcentury, on the eve of Enlightenment – and to make Arthur a real king.”a smart, potentially interesting thing to do."
Camelot in the 15th century? A 15th century England that hadn't had the rule of law or a code of chivalry or a king's counsel for a thousand years? What kind of 15th century England is that?
Sorry, this makes no sense Camelot is unequivocally a dark ages musical. Not a rennaisance, let alone eve-of-enlightenment--three centuries after the 15th by the way-- one. It takes place in a time of legend. Period.
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "It's also a 15th century England with a diverse population of people who express emotion through song (and, if some rumors are true, speak with American accents). As with other fairytales, I'm willing to overlook that element if it adds a layer of interest, knowing that this is perhaps a multiverse coexisting alongside Richard III or Henry V."
Not to be pedantic (I'm totally being pedantic) but the accents in England from the 15th century would probably sound closer to the modern American accent than the modern English one, not to mention in all likelihood the characters would be speaking French.
Going in early April via LincTix. Not a huge fan of the show itself, but I wasn't a huge fan of My Fair Lady or Fiddler on the Roof either until I saw Sher work his magic on both shows in their most recent revivals. It's always a treat to have a Bartlett Sher-helmed production at the Vivian Beaumont - he really knows how to utilize the space.
"There’s nothing quite like the power and the passion of Broadway music. "
And having just seen and been disappointed by the new Sweeney, I’m really hoping for a big, shiny, and opulent Broadway revival of a musical! If anyone can pull that off, it’s Sher.
“Instead of having the story take place in a kind of Middle Earth,” Sorkin said, “I wanted it to take place in a real time and place – England in the late-15thcentury, on the eve of Enlightenment – and to make Arthur a real king.”a smart, potentially interesting thing to do."
Camelot in the 15th century? A 15th century England that hadn't had the rule of law or a code of chivalry or a king's counsel for a thousand years? What kind of 15th century England is that?
Sorry, this makes no sense Camelot is unequivocally a dark ages musical. Not a rennaisance, let alone eve-of-enlightenment--three centuries after the 15th by the way-- one. It takes place in a time of legend. Period.
Good thing this isn't a documentary!
"
Of course it isn't a documentary.
It's a musical play. A musical play about a legend and set in a vividly uncertain legendary moment in the collective imagination.
Forgive me for asking if taking a source play about a legendary figure in a legendary time and a legendary place and rewriting and resetting it in a realistic way in a specific non-legendary time and place a millennium later makes any sense. And for saying no it doesn't .